Mike Parrish Posted March 21, 2023 Author Posted March 21, 2023 Oh dear, Jack Smith tiptoes closer https://abcnews.go.com/US/sources-special-counsel-claims-trump-deliberately-misled-attorneys/story?id=98024191
Bigbrog Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 What...someone misled attorneys...please say it aint so! 1
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 18 minutes ago, Bigbrog said: What...someone misled attorneys...please say it aint so! You don't know why that's important in this case, do you?
Bigbrog Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Mike Parrish said: You don't know why that's important in this case, do you? If you say I don't then you live in that world bud. 1
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 Quote What...someone misled attorneys...please say it aint so! You wrote this, seemingly trivializing this development, which I view as extremely serious. 8 minutes ago, Bigbrog said: If you say I don't then you live in that world bud. Why don't you lay out the reasons that you think this is a trivial development in Trump's case for me. Be specific. Don't be coy.
Bigbrog Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 18 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said: You wrote this, seemingly trivializing this development, which I view as extremely serious. Why don't you lay out the reasons that you think this is a trivial development in Trump's case for me. Be specific. Don't be coy. Honestly, first off, I couldn't care less if Trump gets arrested or not. What I do care about is using the justice system as a political hit job...again, regardless of the person being "investigated" has a "D" or an "R" after their name. To me, this case HAS been investigated...a couple times. Why weren't charges brought then? Point is, charges weren't brought. It is quite obvious the lawyer at the time, is a whackjob/narcissist/conman (maybe more so than Trump), and the other person involved...well, we all know who she is, so both stories wouldn't hold up in any court? Even if she was paid off, there are far worse cases this DA isn't focused on right now. And so you can go ahead and use the overly emotional "extremely serious" to describe this...that is your opinion. My guess is your words used to describe a case like this would be MUCH different if it was someone who has a "D" after their name...not to mention we wouldn't be seeing link after link posted saying "SEE!!!" "SEE!!" "GUILTY!!" But that is your schtick so keep on keeping on. Is that specific enough??? My guess is you'll nitpick a misspelling here or there, say something I said was "Hyperbole" and at the same time call me some juvenal/immature name.
Bigbrog Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 SEE!!! SEE!!! He clearly isn't guilty!! Legal drama surrounding Trump reaches a fever pitch | CNN Politics See how stupid doing that is @Mike Parrish
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Bigbrog said: Honestly, first off, I couldn't care less if Trump gets arrested or not. What I do care about is using the justice system as a political hit job...again, regardless of the person being "investigated" has a "D" or an "R" after their name. To me, this case HAS been investigated...a couple times. Why weren't charges brought then? Point is, charges weren't brought. It is quite obvious the lawyer at the time, is a whackjob/narcissist/conman (maybe more so than Trump), and the other person involved...well, we all know who she is, so both stories wouldn't hold up in any court? Even if she was paid off, there are far worse cases this DA isn't focused on right now. And so you can go ahead and use the overly emotional "extremely serious" to describe this...that is your opinion. My guess is your words used to describe a case like this would be MUCH different if it was someone who has a "D" after their name...not to mention we wouldn't be seeing link after link posted saying "SEE!!!" "SEE!!" "GUILTY!!" But that is your schtick so keep on keeping on. Is that specific enough??? My guess is you'll nitpick a misspelling here or there, say something I said was "Hyperbole" and at the same time call me some juvenal/immature name. You seem to be confused in that you think this recent development that I posted above is about the Stormy Daniels hush money/election finance fraud case. This development is about Trump lying to his lawyers about which classified documents he retained. His lawyer signed an affidavit to the court. If you lie to your attorney and they lie to the court on your behalf, that's obstruction of justice. Further, the judge in the case has ruled that the special prosecutor had cleared the threshold for showing that Trump used his attorney, Corcoran, in the commission of a crime, invalidating attorney/client privilege under the crime/fraud exception. Trump's attorney is being ordered to testify in front of the grand jury. Edited March 22, 2023 by Mike Parrish
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 P.S. MAGA Republicans 2015: Lock her up! 2016: Lock her up! 2017: Lock her up! 2018: Lock her up! 2019: Lock her up! 2020: Lock her up! 2021: Lock her up! 2022: Lock her up! Democrats 2023: Lock him up! Republicans: Hey, you're weaponizing politics!
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 P.P.S. Here's an article that does a better job of explaining. https://abcnews.go.com/US/sources-special-counsel-claims-trump-deliberately-misled-attorneys/story?id=98024191
Bigbrog Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Mike Parrish said: P.S. MAGA Republicans 2015: Lock her up! 2016: Lock her up! 2017: Lock her up! 2018: Lock her up! 2019: Lock her up! 2020: Lock her up! 2021: Lock her up! 2022: Lock her up! Democrats 2023: Lock him up! Republicans: Hey, you're weaponizing politics! Thanks...you proved my point...my guess is in 2015 - 2022 you were like "Nothing to see here!!"...so you are doing the exact same thing the people you can't stand did! Do you not see the hypocrisy? And nice try on the last part...first I am neither a D nor an R....also there is a big difference in that there wasn't some rogue republican DA trying to bring charges against Hillary after she was already investigated and no charges were filed against her. But continue to see it from your bipartisan perspective.
Bigbrog Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 (edited) Also @Mike Parrish I'll admit it...you are right...I was "arguing" the Stormy Daniels thing and not the last link you posted...my bad. Edited March 22, 2023 by Bigbrog
headshuck Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 Alvin “we will not be intimidated” Bragg cancelled proceedings.
jross Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 4 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: P.S. MAGA Republicans 2015: Lock her up! 2016: Lock her up! 2017: Lock her up! 2018: Lock her up! 2019: Lock her up! 2020: Lock her up! 2021: Lock her up! 2022: Lock her up! Democrats 2023: Lock him up! Republicans: Hey, you're weaponizing politics! 1
LJB Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 so... still nobody has been arrested, right? much ado about nothing? again? and again? and again? just curious... 1
mspart Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 5 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: P.P.S. Here's an article that does a better job of explaining. https://abcnews.go.com/US/sources-special-counsel-claims-trump-deliberately-misled-attorneys/story?id=98024191 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-says-special-prosecutor-has-evidence-trump-may-have-broken-law-sources/ar-AA18UOht Judge says special prosecutor has evidence Trump may have broken law: Sources Quite the definitive statement. mspart
mspart Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 5 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: P.S. MAGA Republicans 2015: Lock her up! 2016: Lock her up! 2017: Lock her up! 2018: Lock her up! 2019: Lock her up! 2020: Lock her up! 2021: Lock her up! 2022: Lock her up! Democrats 2023: Lock him up! Republicans: Hey, you're weaponizing politics! Hillary was caught red handed grossly and knowingly mishandling State Dept emails both classified and not. She tried to get rid of the evidence using bleachbit. She had the email server in an unsecure location. If Trump had done this you guys would want to throw the book at him. But Hillary? No problem. She's old and doesn't understand this stuff. And she wants to be President? She knew enough to have a server set up to house this information so it could not easily be traced. She knew enough to get bleachbit and try to wipe the hard drive. That is obstruction of justice but you don't care obviously as noted in your post above. You will whitewash these pecadillos away while piling on Trump. Do you not see the inconsistency of your position? mspart
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 4 minutes ago, mspart said: Hillary was caught red handed grossly and knowingly mishandling State Dept emails both classified and not. She tried to get rid of the evidence using bleachbit. She had the email server in an unsecure location. If Trump had done this you guys would want to throw the book at him. But Hillary? No problem. She's old and doesn't understand this stuff. And she wants to be President? She knew enough to have a server set up to house this information so it could not easily be traced. She knew enough to get bleachbit and try to wipe the hard drive. That is obstruction of justice but you don't care obviously as noted in your post above. You will whitewash these pecadillos away while piling on Trump. Do you not see the inconsistency of your position? mspart Trump had 4 years and a cooperative AG. You'd think they'd have done something if they had something.
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/03/22/trump-appeal-lawyer-classified-documents/ Trump lawyer must turn over evidence on classified documents, court rules
mspart Posted March 22, 2023 Posted March 22, 2023 2 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said: Trump had 4 years and a cooperative AG. You'd think they'd have done something if they had something. Yes true. But you do not say anything here about how bad she handled the emails. You only say she was not indicted. Again, can't you see you are doing the same thing you are complaining about? Your basic argument for Hillary is that she was running for president and shouldn't be indicted because that would disenfranchise millions of Americans who wanted to vote for her. That was the overriding argument, not that she broke the law. Now we have another declared candidate, and you want him in jail as fast as possible. Again, can't you see you are doing the same thing you are complaining about? 4 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/03/22/trump-appeal-lawyer-classified-documents/ Trump lawyer must turn over evidence on classified documents, court rules Trump’s legal team had appealed that ruling, which said the lawyer, Evan Corcoran, must provide evidence to prosecutors because his legal services may have been used to facilitate a possible crime — obstruction of government attempts to recover highly sensitive documents — according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sealed court proceedings. As part of Howell’s ruling, Corcoran was ordered to give the Justice Department notes, transcripts of recordings, and invoices in his possession, according to a person familiar with the matter, who said the judge has reviewed that material and concluded there was evidence suggesting Trump may have misled his own attorneys in the classified-documents matter. On the panel were Florence Pan, a former D.C. Superior Court judge, and J. Michelle Childs, a former South Carolina judge. Both were nominated by President Biden to the federal bench, and Childs was on the president’s shortlist of potential nominees to fill the Supreme Court opening created by the retirement of Justice Stephen G. Breyer. The third judge on the panel, Cornelia T.L. Pillard, was nominated by President Barack Obama. Interesting makeup of the 3 judge panel. And how long do you think it will take to get this before another judge and have this reversed? You must know by now this will go on forever. The language in the article says that Trump may have, that there is evidence Trump may have, but there is no concrete statement reported from the court that I would think should be necessary to drive the elimination of attorney client privilege. If there was a definitive statement from the court that Trump did, then attorney client privilege could be suspended. I guess we'll see how this parses out. mspart
Mike Parrish Posted March 22, 2023 Author Posted March 22, 2023 My basic argument? How about you try not putting words in my mouth?
Nailbender Posted March 23, 2023 Posted March 23, 2023 I'd let him. You don't do well with your own words.
Mike Parrish Posted March 23, 2023 Author Posted March 23, 2023 2 hours ago, Nailbender said: I'd let him. You don't do well with your own words. Go tell your father-brother.
Bigbrog Posted March 23, 2023 Posted March 23, 2023 14 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: My basic argument? How about you try not putting words in my mouth? No one needs to...you do well enough on your own...and all of a sudden you become quite when called out on your bipartisan hypocrisy.
El Luchador Posted March 23, 2023 Posted March 23, 2023 On 3/22/2023 at 11:57 AM, Mike Parrish said: P.S. MAGA Republicans 2015: Lock her up! 2016: Lock her up! 2017: Lock her up! 2018: Lock her up! 2019: Lock her up! 2020: Lock her up! 2021: Lock her up! 2022: Lock her up! Democrats 2023: Lock him up! Republicans: Hey, you're weaponizing politics! Did they lock her up? Did she commit a serious crime? The answer is no and yes. She is a prime example of what is wrong.
Charlie Scanlan Bethlehem Catholic, Pennsylvania Class of 2025 Committed to Columbia Projected Weight: 157
Paris Kelleher Princeton, Texas Class of 2025 Committed to Central Methodist (Women) Projected Weight: 145
Megan Preston Wiregrass Ranch, Florida Class of 2025 Committed to Tiffin (Women) Projected Weight: 160, 180
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now